Doing a coast down test need some help
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: pa
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doing a coast down test need some help
Im not sure if you all know what a coast down test is but its a simple test that allows you to calculate the drag coefficient and the rolling resistance of a car.
Im doing this for a class project i have a 2nd gen rx7 and im going to compare the 1st 2nd and 3rd gen models. What i need from you guys is if any of you can help me get some data for 1rd gens. Heres how the test goes
this test has to be done on a relatively calm day (no wind) and a level road
you need to get your car up to 40 mph and then put it in neutral and time how long it takes to drop to 35 mph
then do the same from 15 mph to 10 mph. thats all.
if a couple of you guys can get me some times that would be great. thanks in advance, i'll post my paper for you guys to read when im done
and if anyone knows the frontal area for a first gen that would be great too.
Im doing this for a class project i have a 2nd gen rx7 and im going to compare the 1st 2nd and 3rd gen models. What i need from you guys is if any of you can help me get some data for 1rd gens. Heres how the test goes
this test has to be done on a relatively calm day (no wind) and a level road
you need to get your car up to 40 mph and then put it in neutral and time how long it takes to drop to 35 mph
then do the same from 15 mph to 10 mph. thats all.
if a couple of you guys can get me some times that would be great. thanks in advance, i'll post my paper for you guys to read when im done
and if anyone knows the frontal area for a first gen that would be great too.
#2
Seven Is Coming
iTrader: (1)
Isnt this highly dependant on the condition of the vehicle? I mean, the different models have different accessories, meaning more or less weight, and the condition of the bearings, brakes and other things can greatly affect the measurements. So a 3rd gen could be better simply because the bearings are newer... Im not trying to rain on your parade, just trying to point out factors that could offset your data because if you are trying to measure the drag of the car, and the breakes are dragging, your readings are gonna be wrong. Of course, Im sure you know all that already .
~T.J.
~T.J.
#7
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm guessing if he can get like 10 different times he'll get a rough average for an SA/FB.
For what it's worth I'll give it a shot next time I'm on some level road. There's not that much level road around here! I remember reading something about how impressive the drag coefficient is for the SA/FB given when it was designed. I'd like to know roughly what it is.
..Matt
For what it's worth I'll give it a shot next time I'm on some level road. There's not that much level road around here! I remember reading something about how impressive the drag coefficient is for the SA/FB given when it was designed. I'd like to know roughly what it is.
..Matt
Trending Topics
#10
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually bbp, do you mind if I change the speeds a little. My speedo is in km/h as I'm in New Zealand.
I converted the mph to km/h and it goes like this..
64km/h -> 56km/h
then
24km/h -> 16km/h
How badly is it going to stuff you up if I do this:
65km/h -> 55 km/h
then
25km/h -> 15km/h
If that doesn't suit let me know some km/h values that are multiples of 5... Judging 1km/h on the speedo is a little hard!
..Matt
I converted the mph to km/h and it goes like this..
64km/h -> 56km/h
then
24km/h -> 16km/h
How badly is it going to stuff you up if I do this:
65km/h -> 55 km/h
then
25km/h -> 15km/h
If that doesn't suit let me know some km/h values that are multiples of 5... Judging 1km/h on the speedo is a little hard!
..Matt
#12
Seven Is Coming
iTrader: (1)
My car (83 GSL with mods in the sig, and weighing 2100 pounds):
40 to 35: 8 Seconds
15 to 10: 13 Seconds
Hope that helps. The 15-10 was on a slight downhill slope, so it might be a little high, and I may do it again if I find another appropriate spot. Anyway, as I said before, I hope that helps .
~T.J.
40 to 35: 8 Seconds
15 to 10: 13 Seconds
Hope that helps. The 15-10 was on a slight downhill slope, so it might be a little high, and I may do it again if I find another appropriate spot. Anyway, as I said before, I hope that helps .
~T.J.
#14
www.AusRotary.com
Drag coefficient of the original series 1 1978 RX-7 in the wind tunnel was 0.36, or 0.35 with factory rear spoiler fitted.
The Cd was reduced to 0.34 in 1981 when the front bumper was redesigned with polyurethane and intergrated front spoiler. The equated to 5hp increase.
I believe the Cd was marginally lower on the 84/85 model due to the redesigned front apron but I can't find the source.
Any front air dam or ridiculous wing will of course increase the Cd and hinder performance.
Anything close to 0.3 Cd is VERY good, so for essentially a 70s body, the RX-7 is great aerodynamically. The FD as a cmoparison has around 0.29 depending on the year and the spoiler fitted.
The Cd was reduced to 0.34 in 1981 when the front bumper was redesigned with polyurethane and intergrated front spoiler. The equated to 5hp increase.
I believe the Cd was marginally lower on the 84/85 model due to the redesigned front apron but I can't find the source.
Any front air dam or ridiculous wing will of course increase the Cd and hinder performance.
Anything close to 0.3 Cd is VERY good, so for essentially a 70s body, the RX-7 is great aerodynamically. The FD as a cmoparison has around 0.29 depending on the year and the spoiler fitted.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
HalifaxFD
Canadian Forum
126
05-09-16 07:06 PM